On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 19:46 +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
quoted text
> > GFP_NOFS is not enough, since swap traffic is IO, hence fall back to GFP_NOIO.
> 
> this comment imply turn on GFP_NOIO, but the code is s/NOFS/NOIO/. why?

Does the misunderstanding stem from the use of 'enough'?

GFP_NOFS is _more_ permissive than GFP_NOIO in that it will initiate IO,
just not of any filesystem data.

The problem is that previuosly NOFS was correct because that avoids
recursion into the NFS code, it now is not, because also IO (swap) can
lead to this recursion.

Therefore we must tighten the restriction and use NOIO.

quoted text
> >  struct nfs_write_data *nfs_commitdata_alloc(void)
> >  {
> > -	struct nfs_write_data *p = kmem_cache_alloc(nfs_wdata_cachep, GFP_NOFS);
> > +	struct nfs_write_data *p = kmem_cache_alloc(nfs_wdata_cachep, GFP_NOIO);
> 
> 
> 
> 

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/